Ok e60 vs f10 the showdown lol
10-27-2010, 08:46 AM
#61
Senior Members
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
My Ride: 2008 535i:
(8/07 Build) Metallic Bronze, Beige NASCA Leather, Ventilated Seats, Sport Pkg, Cold Wxr Pkg, Logic-7 Sound, HUD, Night Vision, PDC, Split Rear Seats, NAV, Premium Pkg, Comfort Access, HD Radio, Sport Auto Trans
Current mods: M-Aero Kit, JB4, Motorcepts 6000k HID Foglamps
Umnitza ICE-Lite 10w LED 6000k AE's
1992 Camaro RS:
Fully Restored w/Custom Interior, 5.0L V8, T-tops, OEM Z28 Foglamps, Inst Cluster, & Spoiler, Custom Sound, Too many engine mods to list
To further add to my previous post, from Carfolio.com (Cx is the aerodynamics governing factor = Cd * A):
520i
2002 E39 520i
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.17 m2
Cx 0.61 (which is Cd x A)
2003 E60 520i: (I ownded one of those)
Drag coefficient 0.260
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.59 (which is Cd x A)
523i
E39: No data
E60 2005 BMW 523i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.63
2007 BMW 523i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.270
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.61
E60 2007 BMW 523i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.260
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.59
F10 2009 BMW 523i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.66
530i
E39 2002 BMW 530i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.300
Frontal area 2.17 m2
Cx 0.65
E60 2003 BMW 530i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.63
E60 2007 BMW 530i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.270
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.61
F10 2009 BMW 528i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.66
535i
E39: Did not exist as turbocharged engine
E60 2007 BMW 535i (US) aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.290
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.655 - I calculated that one
F10 2009 BMW 535i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.290
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.68
550i
E60 2007 BMW 550i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.63
F10 2009 BMW 550i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.300
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.71
If you see the analysis above you will see that the E60 had better aerodynamics than both the E39 and the F10. Please provide any data that proves otherwise.
I do not care if you believe me or not, but I am sure that my car Cd was 0.27 when I bought it. You were not able to refer to any sources that proved that the 2006 523i Cd was otherwise (you only referred to 2005 and 2007), and I challenge you to do so. The analysis above explains why the wind noise was higher in the 523i F10 that I test drove. It is because its Cx is higher by 4.7% than the E60 2005 523i and 11.8% than the E60 2007 Automatic 523i. Also your Cx for the F10 535i is higher than that for the E60 2007 535i by 4%.
Now dodge that.
520i
2002 E39 520i
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.17 m2
Cx 0.61 (which is Cd x A)
2003 E60 520i: (I ownded one of those)
Drag coefficient 0.260
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.59 (which is Cd x A)
523i
E39: No data
E60 2005 BMW 523i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.63
2007 BMW 523i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.270
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.61
E60 2007 BMW 523i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.260
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.59
F10 2009 BMW 523i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.66
530i
E39 2002 BMW 530i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.300
Frontal area 2.17 m2
Cx 0.65
E60 2003 BMW 530i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.63
E60 2007 BMW 530i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.270
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.61
F10 2009 BMW 528i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.66
535i
E39: Did not exist as turbocharged engine
E60 2007 BMW 535i (US) aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.290
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.655 - I calculated that one
F10 2009 BMW 535i Automatic aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.290
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.68
550i
E60 2007 BMW 550i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.280
Frontal area 2.26 m2
Cx 0.63
F10 2009 BMW 550i aerodynamics
Drag coefficient 0.300
Frontal area 2.35 m2
Cx 0.71
If you see the analysis above you will see that the E60 had better aerodynamics than both the E39 and the F10. Please provide any data that proves otherwise.
I do not care if you believe me or not, but I am sure that my car Cd was 0.27 when I bought it. You were not able to refer to any sources that proved that the 2006 523i Cd was otherwise (you only referred to 2005 and 2007), and I challenge you to do so. The analysis above explains why the wind noise was higher in the 523i F10 that I test drove. It is because its Cx is higher by 4.7% than the E60 2005 523i and 11.8% than the E60 2007 Automatic 523i. Also your Cx for the F10 535i is higher than that for the E60 2007 535i by 4%.
Now dodge that
.Break it down, man
BREAK IT DOWN!!!!
10-27-2010, 10:06 AM
#62
Members
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: singapore
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, this is good.
Why are you comparing the E60 530i with the F10 528i?
Here is the 2007 E60 528i's Cd at 0.28 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=158136 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=158136
comparing with the F10 528i also at 0.28 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=207405 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=207383
As for your 2006 523i, here's the relevant page for you to check the kerb weight, compression ratio where the differences are to see whether yours is a 0.27 or 0.28 http://www.carfolio.com/search/resul...h=s&model=523i check and tell me
Why did the website post the Cds for the 2005 and 2007 E60s? Any change in the 2006? Or is the 2006 model more likely the 2005 one instead of the 2007? Why is the F10 referred to as 2009 model?
I made a mistake in the Cd for the 550i, yes it is lower for the E60 compared to the F10
I've said before, you well know the issue is Cd, so try to stay on topic try not to humor yourself by again referring to the non issue
With the above, two F10 models have the same Cd as the E60 (ie the 528i and the 535i), and two models have worse Cds (523i and 550i). Hmmm with this, I accept then it's not wrong to say that the F10 generally has a worse Cd compared to the E60
Why are you comparing the E60 530i with the F10 528i?
Here is the 2007 E60 528i's Cd at 0.28 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=158136 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=158136
comparing with the F10 528i also at 0.28 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=207405 http://www.carfolio.com/specificatio...ar/?car=207383
As for your 2006 523i, here's the relevant page for you to check the kerb weight, compression ratio where the differences are to see whether yours is a 0.27 or 0.28 http://www.carfolio.com/search/resul...h=s&model=523i check and tell me
Why did the website post the Cds for the 2005 and 2007 E60s? Any change in the 2006? Or is the 2006 model more likely the 2005 one instead of the 2007? Why is the F10 referred to as 2009 model? I made a mistake in the Cd for the 550i, yes it is lower for the E60 compared to the F10
I've said before, you well know the issue is Cd, so try to stay on topic
try not to humor yourself by again referring to the non issue With the above, two F10 models have the same Cd as the E60 (ie the 528i and the 535i), and two models have worse Cds (523i and 550i). Hmmm with this, I accept then it's not wrong to say that the F10 generally has a worse Cd compared to the E60
10-27-2010, 11:20 AM
#63
Contributors
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Harrisburg, PA area
Posts: 804
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: SOLD...Jet Black 2008 550i M Sport with SAT, black interior. RPI exhaust and air scoop, 35% huper optik tint all around, CF roundels, flat black kidneys, Springfield Armory XD-40 jet black in glove box, charcoal filter removed.
10-28-2010, 09:15 AM
#64
Senior Members
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My Ride: 523iA, 2006, Silver Grey, Black Leatherette Interior, Fine-Wood Trim Poplar Grain Brown High-Gloss, 6 Speed Automatic Transmission with Steptronic, Automatic Air Conditioning with Extended Content, Interior and Exterior Mirrors with Automatic Anti-Dazzle Function (Incl. Folding Function for Exterior Mirror), Electric Front Seats with Memory for Driver, Multi-Function Steering Wheel with Cruise Control, Adjustable Steering Column, BMW Radio with 8 Speakers and CD Drive, Park Distance Control, Universal Bluetooth Cell Phone, Electric Rear Sunblind
I made a mistake in the Cd for the 550i, yes it is lower for the E60 compared to the F10
I've said before, you well know the issue is Cd, so try to stay on topic try not to humor yourself by again referring to the non issue
With the above, two F10 models have the same Cd as the E60 (ie the 528i and the 535i), and two models have worse Cds (523i and 550i). Hmmm with this, I accept then it's not wrong to say that the F10 generally has a worse Cd compared to the E60
I've said before, you well know the issue is Cd, so try to stay on topic
try not to humor yourself by again referring to the non issue With the above, two F10 models have the same Cd as the E60 (ie the 528i and the 535i), and two models have worse Cds (523i and 550i). Hmmm with this, I accept then it's not wrong to say that the F10 generally has a worse Cd compared to the E60
.
10-28-2010, 08:08 PM
#65
Members
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: singapore
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are you comparing the E60 530i with the F10 528i?
Here is the 2007 E60 528i's Cd at 0.28 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=158136 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=158136
comparing with the F10 528i also at 0.28 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=207405 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=207383
As for your 2006 523i, here's the relevant page for you to check the kerb weight, compression ratio where the differences are to see whether yours is a 0.27 or 0.28 http://www.carfolio....ch=s&model=523i check and tell me Why did the website post the Cds for the 2005 and 2007 E60s? Any change in the 2006? Or is the 2006 model more likely the 2005 one instead of the 2007? Why is the F10 referred to as 2009 model?
Here is the 2007 E60 528i's Cd at 0.28 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=158136 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=158136
comparing with the F10 528i also at 0.28 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=207405 http://www.carfolio....car/?car=207383
As for your 2006 523i, here's the relevant page for you to check the kerb weight, compression ratio where the differences are to see whether yours is a 0.27 or 0.28 http://www.carfolio....ch=s&model=523i check and tell me
Why did the website post the Cds for the 2005 and 2007 E60s? Any change in the 2006? Or is the 2006 model more likely the 2005 one instead of the 2007? Why is the F10 referred to as 2009 model? Does the Cd computation take into account the frontal area?
Definition
The drag coefficient
is defined as:
where:
is the drag force, which is by definition the force component in the direction of the flow velocity,[sup][6][/sup]
is the mass density of the fluid,[sup][7][/sup]v is the speed of the object relative to the fluid, and
is the reference area.The reference area depends on what type of drag coefficient is being measured. For automobiles and many other objects, the reference area is the projected frontal area of the vehicle. This may not necessarily be the cross sectional area of the vehicle, depending on where the cross section is taken. For example, for a sphere 
(note this is not the surface area = 
).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_coefficient
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post